2026:JHHC:18911-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 556 of 2025 With I.A. No. 9298 of 2025 Shambhu Nath Tiwary, S/o Late Parmanand Tiwary, R/o Beside Mufassil Thana (Ranchi Patna Road), PO-Hazaribagh, PS-Mufassil, District-Hazaribagh ... ... Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Excise Commissioner, Officiated at Dhurwa, Near J.N. College, Dhurwa, Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur 4. The Assistant Commissioner, Officiated at near Jail Chowk, Sakchi, Jamshedpur ... … Respondent ----- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Appellant : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Yogesh Modi, AC to AAG-IA ----- Order No. 06 Dated: 29.06.2026 I.A. No. 9298 of 2025 1. Heard Mr. Mukesh Kumar Sinha, who appears along with Mr. Pankaj Kumar for the applicant and Mr. Yogesh Modi, AC to AAG-IA for the State. 2. This application seeks condonation of delay of 1061 days in filing the accompanying appeal against the learned Single Judge’s order dated 08.01.2020 disposing of W.P.(C) No. 6101 of 2012. 3. The only reason offered to explain the delay of 1061 days is in paragraph-4 of the I.A, which reads as under: “That it is humbly submitted that the appellant was unaware of the aforesaid order and when it came into the knowledge of the appellant, the Covid (Pandemic) Period already started from March 2020 and ended on November 2022. Later on due to financial problem, he could not prefer 2026:JHHC:18911-DB 2 appeal against the aforesaid order dated 08.01.2020 because his business was almost sunk due to the said pandemic period.” 4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated 10.01.2022 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020 in RE: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, has held that in cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation, all persons shall have limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022. Further, the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded in computing the limitation period prescribed under any general or special law in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings. 5. In the present case, the limitation period for filing the appeal against the impugned order expired on 07.02.2020, i.e., before the above-referred period commencing from 15.03.2020 and ending on 28.02.2022. 6. Therefore, there is no question of exclusion of the above period based upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 7. In any event, the appeal was filed only on 19.12.2024, which was beyond 28.02.2022 or the 90-day grace period provided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court from 01.03.2022. 8. There is no explanation for why no appeal was filed within the originally prescribed limitation period, and, further, even though the period between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022 was not excludable, there was still no explanation for why the 2026:JHHC:18911-DB 3 appeal was filed only on 19.12.2024. 9. Since no sufficient cause has been shown, we decline to condone the delay. 10. I.A. No. 9298 of 2025 is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the accompanying appeal and any other I.As therein, would not survive and are disposed of without any order for costs. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) June 29, 2026 Manish/Ritesh Uploaded on 30.06.2026